Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-rfc7227bis-00

Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> Tue, 19 September 2017 13:49 UTC

Return-Path: <rwilton@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF5F313432D for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 06:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id goGxjSkTl43L for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 06:49:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36D85134322 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 06:49:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4428; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1505828951; x=1507038551; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Yfu7cYDf+aTG081qif0bBoGFETiAoLEJ0x2uHGXK9dc=; b=IVnZWUK+XorqNlchNcBM62l+kh4r0Pd481wpPu+sXEMNHE8wQ0kbnFzo NiNGGOYAc5To8quiiK/wEj9inyhdx2uu2lkSbmqZP4glGYGnI/AHuTVRe CwrGq3MM20FwZi/oZ4RNLOJdia4rMIaOe+hwDkL+pvqAMVAv/XFEZDhI+ c=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CPAQCCHsFZ/xbLJq1cGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBgy2BEW4ng3WLFJBMCSKWJA6CBAoYC4RJTwKFGRYBAgEBAQEBAQF?= =?us-ascii?q?rKIUYAQEBAQIBAQEhBAsBBTYbCQIOBAYCAiYCAiciDgYBDAYCAQGKJwgQjQWdZ?= =?us-ascii?q?oFtOoskAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARoFgQ6CHYNSgWMrC4JyhEUBEgGDMoJ?= =?us-ascii?q?gBYoFhy6BaI1xlFYCghGFaoNahyONYIdXgTkmBSyBAgsyIQgcFUmHHT82hjuCM?= =?us-ascii?q?gEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,418,1500940800"; d="scan'208";a="657583538"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Sep 2017 13:49:09 +0000
Received: from [10.63.23.66] (dhcp-ensft1-uk-vla370-10-63-23-66.cisco.com [10.63.23.66]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v8JDn9Mn030288; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 13:49:09 GMT
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, netmod@ietf.org
References: <393d3f20-98e3-b4de-e2d7-d627de59ac1f@labn.net> <1505814417.5445.14.camel@nic.cz> <20170919.115915.1668734288988659917.mbj@tail-f.com> <87shfistam.fsf@nic.cz>
From: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <75221540-d587-cd90-60ab-7cf6a8ff5cd4@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 14:49:09 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87shfistam.fsf@nic.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/fpcHHJA8BXy_zMb2FH21I6MJ9d0>
Subject: Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-rfc7227bis-00
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 13:49:17 -0000

Hi Lada,


On 19/09/2017 14:37, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> writes:
>
>> Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I support the adoption but I propose two conceptual changes:
>>>
>>> 1. Introduce a new module name and namespace so that it is not
>>> necessary to carry along the deprecated baggage. If readability is
>>> the primary concern, this is IMO the way to go. Instead of
>>> "ietf-ip-2", I'd suggest something like "ietf- ip-nmda".
>>>
>>> 2. Avoid obsoleting RFC 7277. I believe the old modules may continue
>>> to be used
>>> in areas where NMDA is an overkill, such as open source home
>>> routers.
>> Why wouldn't NMDA be appropriate in an open source home router?  Note
>> that the new model really just have a single tree instead of two
>> trees, so the data that needs to be instrumented is more or less the
>> same.
> It is quite likely that some parts of the data models will be
> implemented only as configuration but not state data. In the "old style"
> modules it is easy to add a deviation for the node(s) under -state but
> in NMDA style this is not possible because we only have one node.
The new YANG library allows different sets of modules to be available 
for <conventional> datastores vs <operational>.   The operational 
datastore can also have different features supported and different 
deviations vs the conventional datastores.

So, the device can make the same deviations to remove the state leaves 
from <operational>.  Or if they don't want to support the module in 
operational at all then a device could just list it as being supported 
in the conventional datastores and not <operational>.

>
> There are subtle differences in the schemas for configuration and state
> data that the NMDA concept doesn't address. If you want another example,
> ietf-routing-2 has the "router-id" leaf that is conditional via the
> "router-id" feature. If this feature is not supported, router-id cannot
> be explicitly configured (it is assigned by the system) but in state data
> "router-id" needs IMO be present in any case. But the if-feature
> isn't able to differentiate between configuration and state data if
> there is only one node for both.
The new YANG library also supports this:

The "router-id" feature would be disabled for the conventional 
datastores, but enabled for <operational>.

>
>> In fact, if we claim that the new architecture is not appropriate for
>> some devices I think we have failed, especially if the conclusion is
>> that we need to maintain two versions of all modules going forward.
> I am not asking for this but, on the other hand, if NMDA versions used a new
> module name and namespace (my item #1, which is what ietf-routing-2
> does), then I don't see any pressing need for obsoleting the old style
> modules.
I think that creating a "-2" versions of these models at this time might 
be a mistake.  I actually think that the "deprecate state leaves" -> 
"obsolete state leaves" -> "delete state leaves" path is a better choice.

Thanks,
Rob


>
> Lada
>
>>
>> /martin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> NMDA
>>> implementors should be aware of the new modules but there is no need to
>>> eradicate the old data models.
>>>
>>> #2 applies also to other modules for which the NMDA version is underway.
>>>
>>> Lada
>>>
>>> PS. The subject is wrong, it shoud be -rfc7277bis-
>>>   
>>> Lou Berger píše v Po 18. 09. 2017 v 10:33 -0400:
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> This is start of a two week poll on making
>>>> draft-bjorklund-netmod-rfc7227bis-00 a working group document. Please
>>>> send email to the list indicating "yes/support" or "no/do not support".
>>>> If indicating no, please state your reservations with the document.  If
>>>> yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see
>>>> addressed once the document is a WG document.
>>>>
>>>> The poll ends Oct 2.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Lou (and Kent)
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> netmod mailing list
>>>> netmod@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>>> -- 
>>> Ladislav Lhotka
>>> Head, CZ.NIC Labs
>>> PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> netmod mailing list
>>> netmod@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod